Category Archives: Fitzhugh newspaper

The following story is an abridged open letter which I sent to the Mayor and Council of Jasper on July 8, 2017. Their email addresses are at the bottom, if you care to write to them. There is much irony in this story, especially in light of the fact that the award pictured here was given to me by the very organization which denied me a busking permit.

A Chronology of Promises & Broken Promises, Steps & Missteps

This story begins about 5 years ago. I made a presentation to Town Council that busking should be allowed in Jasper. It was not legal to busk at the time. I made the case that this little mountain town within a national park and world heritage site was a perfect place for busking, and that it would be a win-win-win situation. It would be good for the musicians, good for the tourists, and good for the town aesthetic. My presentation was well received, and the councillors enthusiastically assured me they would work on making it happen.

It took some time, but finally in 2016, the busking program was launched. To be specific it was Busking Pilot Project #2. Pilot Project #1 occurred during the Arts Days weekend late September 2015, and I took part in that. My band, the “Fiddle River Band”, played on the Saturday afternoon, and it was a great success. People were dancing on the sidewalk.

The 2016 Pilot Project was the first time that busking licences would be sold, and musicians could busk all summer, with a few guidelines stipulating where, when and how long.

Imagine my surprise then when I went to buy my licence, and was sent the curt email,

in light of your recently publicly proclaimed non-inclusive beliefs we have decided to decline a permit to you at this time.

There it was, clearly stated, that it was because of my thoughts that I was not going to be allowed to play my violin on the streets of Jasper.

That was last year. What came next? A season of surveys, meetings, emails, new process, newspaper articles, auditions, vetting buskers, guidelines, and rules.

Winter of 2016 – 2017

In response to numerous queries last summer by both myself and Prof Tony Hall from the University of Lethbridge, the town manager responded that there would be a survey in the fall to determine the success and what problems, if any, arose from the busking project, and then they would be in a position to answer our questions.

Autumn came and went, and there was not much action. There was a general satisfaction survey which included two questions on busking, and another survey for the business community more specifically related to busking.

On February 14th, 2017, busking was on the agenda of the Committee-of-the-Whole Council meeting. I requested a spot on the agenda. Marianne Garrah and Dave Baker of the Habitat for the Arts were also in attendance and made a presentation before mine.

I took note of Marianne Garrah’s comment that the vetting process for buskers should be based on talent and musical ability. This was noted in the minutes. To my understanding, that statement by Garrah was a tacit admission that they had erred the previous summer when they denied me a busking license based on my thoughts. This gave me confidence that this summer would be different.

At the same time, Councillor Gilbert Wall declared openly that I should not be allowed on the streets to busk, and that he could not separate my violin playing from my ideas. It was written about in both newspapers, as being “the elephant in the room” and “given what we know…” – how ominous – Councillor Wall made it clear that there must be “an out”, for them to be able to shut me out.

April 11 2017 Committee of the Whole minutes state that the management of the Busking Pilot Project for 2017 would once again be handed over to the Habitat for the Arts. They also stated that the selection committee should be comprised of people who are qualified to assess musical abilities.

During subsequent meetings, a clear outline of process was made for the busker vetting and selection process. There would be a panel of 5 judges. A point system would be used. Habitat for the Arts would choose a song from the auditionee’s set lists. If the performer “seems shaky on one song you may ask them to perform another song”. The performance would be recorded and sent to other judges who presumably could not all come together at the same time because of busy schedules.

This process implies open visibility of the panel. Several of the guidelines make it clear that this was to be a live audition process. For example, one guideline states

Judges are encouraged to interact with performers (but not for too long, just enough to make them feel comfortable).” Another states: “If a performer doesn’t show up, move on to the next performer on the list.”

After the May 2nd meeting, I immediately struck up a correspondence with the Habitat people to indicate my interest in auditioning for the purpose of acquiring a busking licence. I went in person, and I emailed.

When will the auditions take place? Where should I show up? How will I find out when they take place? Will there be an announcement in the paper? Will they email me? Phone me?

Responses to my attempts at communication were either absent or slow.

Finally I was told that I could simply send them a clip electronically. Pardon me???

What happened to the whole “select a song and if they are shaky pick another one, and please interact but not too much….” scenario? What was going to be a live audition in front of a panel of judges turned into an anonymous “send in your tape”.

I asked Marianne Garrah in person, “This process is open and transparent, correct? The judges’ identities should be public, yes?” She agreed. I asked who the judges are. She started to name them and after naming two, she hesitated, reconsidered, and said,

uhhhhh, I can’t remember who the others are, it’s not really my thing. This is not my project…

….Really??????

End of May, still no buskers on the streets of Jasper.

June – I left town for about two weeks, and when I returned, there were indeed buskers on the street, but only just.

I tried to visit the Habitat several times, to no avail, as nobody was there. I emailed, and asked when I could please pick up my permit, assuming of course that there would be no problem passing the audition process, having sent them the link to my music samples. They all had assured me that they knew I could play. And they did say it was based on talent and musical ability.

Imagine once again my surprise when I received the following unsigned email.

2017-06-20Hello Monika

For 2017 the Jasper Busking program has been designed such that a ‘no meet’ e-committee of community minded individuals are given sound/youtube/audition files provided by the artists. Those files are listened to with the intent of realizing three things: skill of the artist (5potential criteria points), potential enjoyment by the listener (5potential criteria points), and to gain a preception [sic] of the artists stage presence (5potential criteria points). Those criteria points are calculated over the 5 community members and to be warranted a licence the total must equal at least 55 (or 11 out of 15 from each response).

Unfortunately the results that came back to Habitat from the committee did not reflect that total for you. Your application for 2017 has been declined.

Who are these faceless nameless “community minded individuals”? They made rules and guidelines, then broke them all. Live audition process turned into electronic transmission to who knows who, and whoever they are, they reached their objective to keep Monika out. No accountability. No transparency. No legitimate reason was given. They got their way and evaded responsibility. Anonymous judges, faceless nameless individuals, awarding insufficient (zero?) points to one of the best-known musicians in this little town, is rather Kafkaesque, is it not?

The Farce

What did all of this amount to? New process after endless deliberations and meetings, it was all a big facade and nothing more. They did not quite know what to do with Monika Schaefer. They knew they could not openly deny me a license based on lack of musical abilities. They stated it many times, that it was not my music that bothered them, rather, it was my thoughts. My musical background and involvement in this community is extensive and well-known. In fact, some would say I had acquired local celebrity status as a violinist and fiddler, who was in much demand at community functions and fundraisers, both as performer and occasionally also as judge during competitions.

They must have struggled with this problem, because in spite of declaring at the May 2nd council meeting that they would like to see buskers on the streets of Jasper by the May long weekend, they did not appear until some time during the second week of June. I happened to be out of town then – how convenient.

False Diversity Project

The Fitzhugh newspaper reported (March 16, 2017 article page 3 and editorial page 6) that I was the subject of debate in deliberations about a proclamation designating Jasper an “inclusive community”. The Mayor warned that the proclamation could have unforeseen consequences.

It seems to me that inevitably we will run into the elephant in the room that councillor Gilbert Wall spoke about a week ago, that is when you proclaim to be inclusive without limitation then you are forced to confront those with whom you might have the most profound disagreements. ~Mayor Richard Ireland

All the while there is the absolute assumption that I am guilty of a crime – a thought crime. Regardless of whether I am right or wrong – should that even be relevant for the acquisition of a busking licence? Did we once pride ourselves on having freedom of speech in Canada?

Various agencies in the town of Jasper have designated themselves judge, jury and enforcers against the alleged thought crimes of Monika Schaefer. All the while, there is never so much as a glimmer of introspection, not the slightest interest in making enquiries into the issues which I have raised. In fact, the opposite is true. The ferocious attack against me is designed to frighten anyone else from looking.

There is simply a blanket acceptance of the prevailing dogma, and anyone who dares question is guilty of “racial incitement”. The very act of questioning is criminalized. The nasty little label “hate speech” is applied, and that’s that. Evidence is not required when something is “self-evident”. The Doctrine of Judicial Notice allows courts to recognize as “fact” matters that are “common knowledge”. The victors write the history books, so when they say it is so, then it is so. They determine what becomes “common knowledge”.

Inclusive community is a fraudulent concept in Jasper. Diversity in Jasper does not include thoughts.

Dear Mayor and Councillors, is this what you call due process? Is this not an EXACT fulfillment of some of my concerns expressed earlier in the winter? I thought we had reached an understanding that playing music should have NOTHING to do with a person’s views. Are you going to stand by and support the Habitat in their fraudulent project? Is this your legacy, turning the righteous town of Jasper, all-inclusive Jasper, into a narrow thought-policing agency?

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the UN Declaration of Human Rights are not being respected here in this little town in the midst of a National Park and a World Heritage Site.

The Jasper Diversity Project is a sham. The Jasper busking program is a farce. The proclamation of Inclusive Community is a joke. And most especially, the Habitat for the Arts Values and Principles Statement, all about “learning never stops…, embrace new challenges and ideas…, grow through knowledge exchange and support…” earns all three descriptors: sham, farce and a joke.

Jasper has two newspapers. The weekly is called the Fitzhugh, and regular readers of this blog will already know that the Fitzhugh staff have been very hostile towards me in their coverage of the controversy surrounding my video called “Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the holocaust“.

The other paper is called The Jasper Local, and comes out twice per month. The publisher/editor Bob Covey has been much more level-headed, and definitely never hostile. This does not mean he agrees with my conclusions – quite the contrary – but he is not blindly reactionary. In an editorial last summer (link here, scroll down to Aug 15, 2016), he wrote this:

These days it seems people are so keen to be outraged. It seems that it doesn’t take much for folks to fly off the handle, to get up in arms. Admittedly, when a community member decrees the Holocaust a lie, it’s a tough pill to swallow, but still: the leap from questioning the stories we’ve been told to promoting hate-speech is a large one. Based on the evidence at hand, it’s not one I’m willing to take.

After I made a presentation to Town Council in February about the irrelevance of a person’s views in relation to the question of acquiring a busking licence, hostilities in the town rose once again. Apparently those who feel threatened by the historical truths that I am speaking openly about did not like it that I appeared to be getting a leg up. (I wrote about the presentation here.) Bob Covey wrote about the meeting in his February 15th newspaper, pictured below, the article entitled Council gets an earful on busking. He chose, from his archives, a friendly picture of me with a big smile, twirling a hoolahoop around my waste, and holding a “save the trees” sign high above my head. I cannot find the article on the website or I would link it here. He did a fair reportage of the meeting.

The next two editions of The Jasper Local carried letters in reaction. Here are some excerpts from Vancouverite Paul Brooke’s March 1st poisonous letter:

I’m writing in response to your soppy sympathetic editorial supporting Monika Schaefer. I deeply resent the way in which you support Schaefer’s “right to her opinion.” It’s blatantly obvious that the two of you just don’t get it. [….] People like you live in some kind of bubble, thinking that “poor Monika” should have the right to spew her objectionable nonsense [….] Yes, free speech is a part of our democracy, but criminal hate speech is not. Schaefer talks about the “thought police” on Jasper town council who stand up to her. [….] I don’t need her disgusting Alternative Facts disguised as enlightenment for the masses. It’s nothing but hateful garbage. ~Paul Brooke~ North Vancouver, B.C.

Next edition, on March 15, came a slightly more polite letter entitled “Horrors of war” by Harry Home. I cannot find Home’s letter on The Jasper Local website, but a similar one was published in the Fitzhugh. Unlike the Fitzhugh publisher Craig Gilbert, Bob Covey did give me the right of response. My letter was published April 1, 2017 in The Jasper Local.

RE: Horrors of war

Dear Editor,

Debate is forbidden in a totalitarian society. Evidence becomes irrelevant. Books are burned.

I agree with Harry Home’s sentiments (The Jasper Local, March 15, 2017) about most people being loving and peaceful. I also agree that wars are horrible. That is why I am putting so much on the line. A world of lies and deceptions is a world of war and turmoil. I am motivated by love and I am working for peace.

I disagree with Home’s statement that “there is definite evidence of the murder of millions of Jews, and that the death camps did exist…” People keep repeating that statement like a mantra, but where is the evidence? The Toronto Holocaust Trials of the 1980s showed plenty of evidence to the contrary, and holocaust trials have been avoided ever since.

Many people, including Jews, died in the work camps. Most deaths occurred as a result of starvation and disease during the last few months of the war, as supply lines were cut due to Allied bombing.

Amazon just engaged in a massive modern-day book burning, when scores of titles disappeared from their site. These books put into question the orthodox holocaust narrative. Many scholarly works containing archival primary source material have been thrown down the memory hole. Perhaps we can interpret this as a ringing endorsement of those books. It is best to vaporize them when one cannot refute what is written in them.

Even the act of erasing the books is itself erased, as mainstream media outlets either ignore it, or claim that only 3 book titles were eliminated. I personally own more than 3 of the disappeared books. But again, facts are irrelevant in George Orwell’s world.

Why is hatred and scorn levelled at those who peacefully express dissent? Those who question the orthodoxy are criminalized by way of “hate speech” laws. Everything is turned on its head by criminalizing truth revealers and calling them the haters.

Is this event called “the holocaust” really so cut and dried?

Surely the reaction alone should be enough to alert thinking people everywhere that there might be some flaws in the prevailing narrative. If I was so wrong about the conclusions I have reached about WW2 history, nobody would feel threatened by what I am saying. They could simply present the evidence.

Truth does not fear investigation.

Monika Schaefer, Jasper

Predictably, pushback came in the next edition April 15th

It could be called Hate times 13

I counted the word “hate” or “hatred” thirteen times in this letter! hmmmm… who is hating whom? I have reproduced the letter here, interspersed with my commentaries.

Hate Begins With Words

by Jessica Gomes, Jasper

Re: Monika Schaefer’s April 1st Letter

Dear Editor,

Holocaust denial must be confronted. Not because there is a truth to be hidden or a secret “orthodox” conspiracy, but because hate begins with words. Hate began with words before the holocaust when millions of Jews, Roma, Christians, Communists, homosexuals and disabled people were dehumanized, criminalized, discriminated against, and murdered. We see this same hate continue today with words and actions of holocaust deniers.

M.S. I am a little confused. So the murder of all these people took place before the holocaust??? Well let’s see how all this is explained. An awful lot of “hate” so far… I wonder if Gomes realizes that Judea declared war against Germany in 1933.

Although Monika Schaefer and other deniers may mimic and mirror the practices of historians and legitimate scholars, their pantomimed “research” is a misleading and thinly veiled farce designed to propagate anti-Semitism and hate. It is true that “truth does not fear investigation,” and to its credit, (“to its credit”? whose credit?) the Holocaust is one of the most well documented and investigated events in human history. The evidence is irrefutable, undeniable, overwhelming, and it is not a “prevailing narrative.” It’s what happened.

M.S. Lots of hot air here to smear me, but not much substance so far. About that meme, “..most well documented and investigated….” that’s what they say. But where is the evidence please? They sure couldn’t show it in court! And where is all that documentation? In all the tons of German government documents and archives seized at the end of the war, not a single piece of paper was ever found that said anything about a plan or intention to kill the Jews. Even the leading Jewish holocaust historian Raul Hilberg had to concede during the Great Holocaust Trial in 1985 that there must have been an “incredible meeting of minds”. You can read about it here.

Hate begins with words. Monika Schaefer’s letter to the editor is perforated with hate and anti-Semitism: some obvious, some slyly inserted with conspiracy theorist code words and nonsense. We have a duty to call out Monika Schaefer’s words for what they are: hate masqueradingt as innocent questioning and dissent.

Holocaust deniers are thirsty for attention, and any quick Google search yields a plethora of results for holocaust denial across the dark corners of the Internet. We cannot in good conscience give them yet another platform, especially a legitimate media platform, on which to spew hate, lies, and anti-Semitism. No mainstream newspaper would publish hate filled diatribes arguing for the reinstatement of segregation, the repeal of LGBTQ rights, or the repeal of the right to vote for women. All of these opinions may be protected by free speech, and their proprietors are welcome to them, but they cannot be shocked or offended when those opinions are not welcome in the classroom, on the evening news, or in this very newspaper. Free speech is not absolute in Canada.

M.S. More tactics, attacking the messenger – “thirsty for attention” – where have I heard that before? People who question the official story about 19 Arabs with boxcutters bringing down 3 modern skyscrapers with 2 airplanes on 9/11 get those same accusations.

In those “dark corners of the Internet”, oh that scary place, heaven forbid you should dare to go there and think for yourself and try to sort out the facts from the disinformation. Better to get your information from the “legitimate” mainstream media, the same media that dutifully reported Sadam Hussein tossing premature babies out of hospital incubators, as well as all those weapons of mass destruction which inconveniently failed to materialize, nevertheless were the justification for waging war.

Amazon and other publishers are not legally prohibited or censored by the government from selling this sort of content, and if they choose not to host hate filled publications or holocaust denial, it’s their choice, not totalitarianism. Amazon’s guidelines state that their publications cannot “promote or glorify hatred, violence, racial, sexual or religious intolerance.” It is not a reflection of the state of free speech, but of a free market. Holocaust deniers are more than welcome to publish their own works and create their own platforms, many of whom already have.

M.S. When the information in the books cannot be refuted, then the powers-that-be destroy or remove them, and vilify anyone who dares to speak about this information.

Fighting holocaust denial is not a question of barring debate or limiting free speech. Those that seek to perpetuate denial can do so freely with their voices, on the Internet, and in their own circles. But we must guard against this kind of hate, and deny it a home or the cloak of legitimacy in our academia and our media.

M.S. It is a complete contradiction to say that it is “not a question of barring debate or limiting free speech”, while at the same time supporting the criminalization of dissent and using weaponized language in order to shut down critical thought and debate.

There are absolute certainties in life and history. These are irrevocable facts we know and have proven to be true with evidence and careful study: the earth is not flat, the sun does not revolve around the Earth, and the holocaust happened.

~Jessica Gomes, Jasper

ED’S NOTE: THIS IS THE LAST LETTER THE JASPER LOCAL WILL PUBLISH ON THIS SUBJECT UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE(that’s okay Bob, I don’t blame you, I know you were under a lot of pressure!~M.S.)

Concluding thoughts

This “absolute certainty… the holocaust happened” that Jessica Gomes finishes her letter with, is somewhat like the Doctrine of Judicial Notice. That doctrine allows the courts to recognize as “fact” matters that are “common knowledge”. Evidence is not required because the holocaust is self-evident. This is a circular argument, and makes absolutely no sense. Just as Gomes is unable and unwilling to provide a shred of evidence to back up her declaration that the holocaust happened. But then again, when judges declare that the truth is no defence, and evidence is not required, then what can we expect?

Gomes uses every trick in the book in her attempt to discredit me. She distracts from the topic by coupling it with unrelated subjects, she personally insults me, she repeats the claim that it is the most studied and documented event in our history without telling us what that evidence might be, she uses lots of weaponized trigger words, and she repeatedly slings mud my way. She does not present arguments in response to any of my points. Instead she labels me a hater. She personifies, in her letter, the very thing she accuses me of.

Rights and Wrongs in Syria and Canada

by Professor Tony Hall

winter scene of Jasper Townsite within Jasper National Park

In “Double-Double: 12 Months a Refugee” lawyer Reham Al Azem looks back over her experiences culminating in her first year of life as a “permanent resident” in Canada. Through the intervention of the Anglican Church, Ms. Al Azem along with her parents came to reside in the town site of Jasper National Park. The March 30 issue of Jasper’s Fitzhugh newspaper includes an essay describing Ms. Al Azem’s reflections on her family’s departure from Syria and the trio’s subsequent adjustments to life in their newly adopted land.

In telling the story of the move from Syria to one of Canada’s most famous alpine parks, Ms. Al Azem shares many poignant observations and anecdotes. One aspect of her account that I believe requires some contextual analysis is the very pronounced position she has taken in condemning the government of the elected Syrian President, Bashar Al-Assad.

Ms. Al Azem’s contempt for those in charge of the Syrian government is palpable. As the author sees it, the Syria she left behind has “a corrupt legal system” where many “innocent friends and family members” were being improperly arrested. She reserves especially harsh verbal venom for the Syrian militia who she accuses of imposing its will on Syrian citizens “regardless of the law or people’s rights.” She writes, “It seemed, in Syria, the sound of money was louder than the sound of human rights.”

Ms. Al Azem’s critique of the Assad government emerges in the course of her account of an episode involving a van that crashed into the window of a Damascus café injuring the author’s mother, Omayea El Marawi. The importance of this episode in the Fitzhugh essay is underlined by the publisher’s decision to include a photograph of the decisive car crash said to have set in motion the refugee saga.

In describing her juridical efforts to hold the driver of the runaway vehicle responsible for the injury to her mother, Ms. Al Azem presents a litany of recriminations against Syrian officialdom including members of the police and the judiciary. She sets her comments against a grim picture of shortages and deprivations in her native land. “There was a lack of jobs, electricity was limited, cooking gas was sparse and heat for our home was hard to come by.”

Ms. Al Azem neglects to mention that the difficulties she encountered in Syria unfolded in the context of wartime conditions. In this war, our own Canadian government has taken sides with other Western countries, puppet regimes and proxy armies to advance the goal of overthrowing the elected and legitimate government of Bashar Al-Assad. There is much evidence to demonstrate that the rather secular and pluralistic government headed up by the current president commands the loyalty of the largest part of the Syrian citizenry. Among his most enthusiastic supporters are members of Syria’s Christian minority. Bashar Al-Assad’s most vicious enemies are especially hostile towards Syrian Christians.

A new threshold in the illegal assaults on the government, people and sovereignty of Syria was crossed on April 6, 2017 when the government of US President Donald Trump mounted a tomahawk missile attack on a Syrian military airport. This armed invasion marks an unmistakable act of illegal aggressive warfare. The unproven allegations given as justification for the attack showed every sign of the engineered deceptions that are emblematic of the psychological operations integral to the perpetration of the so-called Global War on Terror.

The escalating severity of the foreign-backed efforts to overthrow the Assad government and destroy Syria in its present form extends the cycle of Western-backed and Western-perpetrated violence pointed at Muslim majority countries including Iraq, Libya, Sudan, and Yemen.

The unqualified Western backing given to the hugely reactionary, repressive and anti-democratic monarchy of Saudi Arabia, a major consumer of the West’s high-tech weaponry, is an indicator of the hypocrisy and double standards animating the Middle East policies of Israel and the NATO countries including USA, Turkey and Canada. As the people and government of Syria are being pummeled, so too the civilian population of Yemen is being subjected to a huge onslaught of weaponized Western aggression channeled through the elaborate military apparatus of Saudi Arabia.

Contextual Considerations

Of course this commentary on the contextual framework of “Double-Double: 12 Months a Refugee” should not be understood as a criticism directed at Reham Al Azem and her personal reflections. Of course Ms. Al Azem has every right to comment as she sees fit on her experiences and perceptions of life in Syria and Canada. Indeed, her essay makes a significant contribution in helping to bring to light some features of the instigated migration currently transforming the human geography of many polities right now.

My critique in this matter is more directed at the publisher of the essay rather than at its author. Craig Gilbert is the Publisher of the Jasper Fitzhugh, a division of Aberdeen Publishing LP whose president is Robert W. Doull. These media executives opted not to introduce Ms. Al Azem’s important narrative with an overview of what has been happening in recent years to drive people out of Syria, Iraq and other countries in the region. Moreover, the Fitzhugh publisher has opted not to share with Jasper’s citizens any other personal narratives that look at what is going on in Syria from any perspective different from that of Ms. Al Azem.

The result is Ms. Al Azem’s story assumes an inflated significance that suggests her perspective is somehow representative of all sensible and law abiding Syrian citizens. Such is decidedly not the case. Generally speaking the mainstream media has ignored the perspectives of the millions of Syrian people who have chosen to stay put and defend their country from foreign-backed invasion. The big media conglomerates tend to demean the shared humanity of those who have chosen to back their own Syrian government. These Syrian patriots have chosen to pull together across many ethnic, religious and ideological lines to prevent Syria from falling prey to the same kind of horrific fate visited on Libya after NATO’s vanquishment of Gadaffi.

By providing only a single window into the internal dynamics of the Syrian conflict, the Jasper Fitzhugh is adding to the distortion of public understanding of some very complex realities. This purposeful blinkering of public perceptions aids and abets a particular agenda of Canadian domestic and foreign policy in ways that are entirely consistent with more pervasive patterns of media deception. This genre of misrepresentation is currently left to run almost completely unchecked in many of Canada’s highly biased and conformist venues of mass communication.

The rigidness of this system of propaganda and thought control is causing discerning students of public affairs to turn away in droves from discredited mainstream media venues. Too often the institutional backing is not there when conscientious journalists attempt to speak truth to power. On the big issues of war and peace, life and death, dominant media venues tend to line up with the military-industrial banking cartels that control Western governments. As demonstrated by the covert and overt involvements of our governments in the Syrian war, our political leadership is deeply implicated in an intense deluge of illegal actions and stunning deceptions. The magnitude of the international crimes committed in this surreptitious way far exceeds the severity of the crimes that Ms. Al Azem attributes to the Syrian government.

Mark Taliano is another emerging star of Canadian investigative journalism with a specialty in the Syrian debacle. A retired high school teacher from Southern Ontario, Taliano has recently published a short book, Voices From Syria. In it Taliano draws on his travels to Syria where he conducts many interviews with Syrian decision makers and regular folks. His analysis is also based on his deep reading of many primary and secondary sources.

Aspects of Taliano’s critique of the mainstream media’s role as agents of propaganda can easily be applied to the Jasper Fitzhugh’s very selective treatment of the Syrian war. Ms. Al Azem’s hostile attitude to the elected government of Syria just happens to be in perfect alignment with a main message of the psychological warfare division in the West’s deadly campaign to eliminate the Assad government. The coalition pushing the “regime change” scenario includes the Persian Gulf monarchies, Israel, NATO along with the West’s Takfiri proxy armies.

Both Bartlett and Taliano draw upon an extensive body of evidence to demonstrate that the heavily armed entities in Syria regularly described as “terrorists” in the mainstream media are in fact proxy armies. They are financed and armed by state entities dedicated to the overthrow of the Al Assad government. These much-hyped bands of armed mercenary soldiers go by many names including Al-Nusra Front, ISIL, Daesh, Al Qaeda, Jaish al-Fatah and Ahrar ash-Sham. The failure of the mainstream media to tell the truth about the backstory of “terrorism” in Syria is widely replicated by controlled media such as the Jasper Fitzhugh.

Put simply, there is no shortage of credible sources sprinkled throughout the Internet to illustrate that the very Western powers supposedly fighting “the terrorists” have in fact recruited, trained, armed, financed and directed these same mercenary pawns. This mobilization of paid proxy armies who have been well rewarded to inject an Islamic dimension into the West’s imperial wars began with the CIA-s creation of al Qaeda in the 1980s.

It is well documented that al Qaeda was part of the US-assembled group to advance the policies of US President Ronald Reagan by militarily undermining the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan. For thoughtful observers the US government’s deployment of al Qaeda as a proxy force in Afghanistan and now in Syria should raise alarms about the Western establishment’s claim that al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden were the main culprits of 9/11. How is it that the US government is currently sponsoring the very group it still alleges are the perpetrators of 9/11? Does this deployment of Takfiri fighting forces to topple the Assad government fit into a larger plan to balkanize the Middle East and prepare the ground for the invasion of Iran?

Psychological engineering forms an integral part in the Global War on Terror. The engineering of public opinion and attitudes depends on the mass media’s maintenance of tight prohibitions against any sustained analysis of the important role played by the West’s mercenary proxy armies flying Islamic flags. The West’s psychological warfare is pointed largely against its own western populations. The unrelenting media disinformation has created a toxic mental atmosphere with the goal of eliciting public consent for abominations likes Trump’s missile assault on the sovereign people and government of Syria. Will Jasperites, Canadians and decent men and women throughout the world go along with this very clear violation of international law?

As Taliano sees it, too many of us have been lulled into complacency by a corrupt media that fails to give the necessary illumination to the great issues of war and peace, life and death in the global community. He asserts, “most Canadians unfortunately, remain captured by the propaganda and have become immune to publicly available evidence-based research.” Referring to the Western backing of the very same entities the West claims to be fighting, Taliano continues, “Our proxies slit throats, chop heads, and take no prisoners as we in the West waffle in indecision and take the comfortable easy road of believing the labyrinth of lies promulgated by Western media messaging.”

Human Rights and Intellectual Diversity in Jasper

In expressing her contentment with her decision to move with her parents to Canada, Reham Al Azem comments that “peace is where you can defend your rights if there is a threat to them.” Is the Fitzhugh a champion or an opponent of the very rights Ms. Al Azem extolls? Is Jasper a place that embraces or demeans the right of Canadians to enjoy safety and security in our own homes; where we the citizens can express ourselves clearly in accordance with the principles of free speech as well as freedom of conscience, religion, conviction, and assembly?

In the same March 30, 2017 issue that contains the “12 Months a Refugee” essay, the Fitzhugh’s publisher exposes his hostility to the rights of one Jasper citizen. Through the gift of musical acumen, this Jasper citizen, Monika Schaefer, has for almost four decades contributed enormously to the community life of her mountain village. A violin teacher, Ms. Schaefer has performed voluntarily for appreciative audiences in schools and old folks homes as well as in countless benefit concerts. One of the concerts at which Ms. Schaefer performed was devoted to raising money to help bring Ms. Al Azem and her parents to Jasper.

By publishing a letter attributed to one “Paul Brooke” of North Vancouver British Columbia, the publisher of the Fitzhugh extends broad latitude to an individual living far from Jasper to defame Ms. Schaefer in full view of her home community. Brooke’s slanderous attack culminates in a statement where Ms. Schaefer is told her residency in Jasper “is a privilege, not a right.” The Vancouverite’s condemnation emanates from his criticism of Ms. Schaefer for giving voice to interpretations of World War II history that do not conform with mainstream viewpoints.

If the policies and opinions of Jasper’s Fitzhugh toward Monika Schaefer are any indication, perhaps Ms. Al Azem might reflect on the apparently conditional nature of respect for human rights in her adopted community. Perhaps the means for “protecting her rights” are not as solid and entrenched in Canada as she thought.

The limits on respect for human rights in Jasper arise in the context of a Canadian society that apparently grants a lot of latitude to those who seek to prohibit, ban and systematically defame citizens that express interpretations discordant with mainstream orthodoxy. Jasper advertises itself as a place where diversity is respected. As the smear campaign against Ms. Schaefer demonstrates, however, the reality of antagonism towards intellectual diversity in Jasper is very different from the town’s slick PR slogans and images.

In their response to Ms. Schaefer’s controversial video entitled Sorry Mom, I Was Wrong About the Holocaust, some key members of the community are demonstrating a marked hostility to the ideals of free expression. Instead of creating venues for the rational discussion of competing narratives, some have chosen to dramatize their disagreement with Ms. Schaefer by blocking her from obtaining licenses and accessing certain businesses and cultural venues. Rather than stand up for the protection of human rights, the publisher of the Fitzhugh has opted to lead the dark enterprise of ritual defamation.

If the powers that be are guided by the principle that living in Jasper is a privilege, not a right, who will qualify for this privilege? Will all residents of Jasper as well as its businesses and clubs be subjected uniformly to an ideas test to see if they qualify for residency privileges? What would be the criteria for such a test? Who would administer it?

Would the Fitzhugh and its publisher qualify for residency? Would their apparent hostility to the principles of free speech as articulated in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms be held against them? Will those responsible for transforming the Royal Canadian Legion in Jasper, an important venue for live music, pass the privilege test?

Will the self-appointed ideological commandants that own and operate CoCo’s Café in Jasper qualify? What is to be said of their claim that vendors in Alberta have full discretion to express their prejudices by refusing to do business with any group or individual they opt to shun? Will those in charge of Jasper’s Habitat for the Arts be held accountable for the exclusionary treatments meted out to Ms. Schaefer? What is the effect on artists, of subjecting their creative endeavours to tests for intellectual conformity to prevailing ideas?

Who in Jasper are the most aggressive violators of the very rights whose attractions apparently motivated Ms. Al Azem and her parents to move from Syria to Jasper National Park? Is there truth to the proposition that one can know the true rulers of a society, by identifying the parties one is not allowed to criticize?

***************************

After the article was published in the American Herald Tribune, I sent the link to numerous local contacts in Jasper, with this message: “Here is a deeper analysis of local affairs in the global context, a timely article by Professor Tony Hall.” I received the following sneering remark from Dr. Mark Addison.

Monika , your recent article on the Syrians in Jasper could possibly have had some credibility, however, after your previous statements regarding the holocaust, nobody believes anything you say anyway.

I subsequently thanked Mark for engaging with me and told him I was pleasantly surprised. I pointed out to him that I was not the author of the article. I thanked him for the compliment of thinking it was me who authored it. I told him that Professor Anthony Hall is a historian who has been studying these issues for a very long time.

I wonder though if by mere association, Dr. Addison believes that anything my friends or associates write cannot be believed either. Interesting concept. It is, after all, one of the effects of the practice of ritual defamation, where evidence and truth matter not.

Jasper’s weekly newspaper called Fitzhugh has become the channel through which vitriol and venom towards this Politically-Incorrect writer has been escalated lately. They have scant regard for fair journalism in the form of providing proper context and the right of response or for fact-checking.

A few weeks ago I wrote about the Town Council meeting at which I made a presentation about the unresolved busking issue. It seems that the moment things appeared to be looking up for me, someone got busy contaminating the good will which was present at that meeting. Immediately I felt hostilities rising, both on the street and in the Fitzhugh. The article about the meeting certainly was skewed in that it did not reflect the tone of the meeting. Amazing how that happens when certain parts are suppressed and others elevated and taken out of context.

Week after week since mid February, the assaults in the paper continued. The culmination of it was the March 30, 2017 newspaper which carried yet another letter by a person who lives far away from this little town of 5000, someone who is unknown to this community and really has nothing to do with this town. Why is he so interested in defaming me? He claims to be Paul Brooke from North Vancouver.

A little context for this letter is the article from the week before, in which I learnt that a defamation lawsuit has been filed against me. That was interesting news to me.

Every single sentence in this letter is highly crafted for maximum damage to me, and psychologically targeting the community to do more shunning – they have been too nice!

Dear editor,

I just read your article in the March 23 edition of the Fitzhugh concerning Daniel Gallant and Monika Schaefer.

I’m delighted to see Daniel Gallant’s court challenge against Schaefer, and congratulate the Fitzhugh for excellent and responsible reporting.

Until recently, there has been an understandable tendency in Jasper to overlook or downplay the Schaefer story.

Everyone is entitled to their own private beliefs and opinions, but not to shove them in other people’s faces like Schaefer has done.

Her carefully crafted image as “just a peaceful little old lady who wants freedom of speech” simply doesn’t accord with the known facts.

Her public association with known extremists, anti-Semitic websites and international neo-Nazi groups is evident to anyone who takes the time to look.

Schaefer has drawn negative international attention to herself and the town of Jasper, tarnishing the image of a truly great community by her presence.

She seems to relish her self-imposed status as a persecuted martyr of historical revisionism and the extremist alternate right.

She doesn’t seem to get the fact that living in Jasper is a privilege, not a right.

Paul Brooke
North Vancouver, B.C.

Wow! What can I say? Well, like a friend of mine says, it is just so over-the-top, it kind of speaks against itself. Who is he? Why does he target someone in a little community so far from where he lives?

That was a sample of our friendly neighbourhood newspaper.

On the Street

I had an interesting experience the other day. My friend and I went for breakfast at Coco’s Cafe, a place that I had not frequented since before my fateful Sorry Mom, I was wrong about the holocaust video. I have to admit that I was a little curious how the proprietor would react to my presence. I had a feeling that she would not be neutral towards me and that she might have strong feelings either very positive or very negative. She wasn’t there when we ordered and had our large breakfast. We enjoyed some quiet conversation and left.

Just outside the door, I looked up and lo-and-behold there was the proprietor walking straight towards us. I smiled at her and said “Hi Lynn!” There was no smile coming back at me, but just a silent glare, all the while marching towards us while we were standing in front of her Cafe. When she was about to disappear through the door, I said “We just enjoyed a lovely breakfast in your place!” This was genuine, with not a hint of insincerity.

Lynn stopped in her tracks, squarely faced me, and declared: “Monika, you are not coming back into my restaurant! You are not welcome here, you are not coming through these doors again. They (the servers inside) just didn’t know. It would be a conflict of interest for me to let you eat here!”

“Conflict of interest?”, I asked in disbelief. “Conflict of interest?”

“Yes, conflict of interest. I am on the board of the Legion.” As though that should explain everything and be the most natural thing in the world. Well perhaps in Jasper it is natural, where the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 31 president Ken Kuzminski has declared me persona non grata on their premises, ever since early last summer.

My friend Tony Hall told Lynn that she had just subordinated her restaurant business to the thought police business. She retorted that the law says she can serve whoever she wanted, and by extension refuse service to whomever she chose. That was that. She disappeared through the door, leaving us standing there, jaws dropped, quite in shock.

Growing up in Canada, this seemingly utopian country, during the 60s and 70s, I did not conceive of the possibility that political dissidents or prisoners could even exist here. I was aware of political dissidents being imprisoned in far away dictatorships, under tyrannical regimes. But here, we had freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and we had government for the people, by the people and of the people.

Or so I believed.

Several events have converged in the last two weeks which truly are breathtaking, conjuring up George Orwell’s powerful novel entitled 1984. We thought that was a science-fiction horror book and film. Little did we know that the MI6 agent was giving the world a warning.

THOUGHT CRIME IN GERMANY

In my last post, I mentioned the fake media reports that Alfred Schaefer had been charged in Germany. I wondered then if it was a case of “calling the shots”, or perhaps an attempt at intimidation. I had also wondered if it was similar to the 5 dancing Israelis caught “documenting” the 9/11 event, in other words, they had foreknowledge of the event. Continue reading →

The Chair of the Jasper Environmental Association informed me that it would be best if the JEA and I go our separate ways. In response I wrote a letter to the entire membership, posted below. But first, here are responses from two of the members, very happy that I have been expelled. Below my letter, a response from a former member who disagrees with the expulsion.

Ben Gadd surprises me the most. He was a draft dodger from the USA during the Vietnam war, and he always told us that we should question everything, don’t trust authority, and that governments lie to us all the time. So of all people, I would have thought he would be a little more open-minded. Even the 9-11 story was too much for him to see through when we had that debate a few years ago. He already labelled me a “conspiracy nut” back then.

Please know that we support the decision to expel Monika from the JEA. Allowing her to remain a member would reflect badly on the organization, and other members are bound to be uncomfortable with her presence at meetings.

This is not about free speech. Holocaust denial is just plain evil. It’s terribly insulting to survivors and their families, it’s a fraudulent attempt to rewrite history, and it’s a thin cover for antisemitism, which has a horrible record of injustice and human-rights violations going back many centuries.

For these reasons and others, holocaust denial is an indictable offense in many countries, especially in Europe, either directly or as hate speech.

In Canada, at least four people have been convicted of hate crimes (and the convictions upheld on appeal), including Eckville school teacher Jim Keegstra. German-born holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel, who spent four decades in Canada and whose writings Monika recommends to us, was deported to Germany as a security threat. He was promptly arrested there and imprisoned for five years. For a good article about hate crimes in Canada see http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/when-is-it-hate-speech-7-significant-canadian-cases-1.1036731.

Western democracies enshrine freedom of speech. But promulgating anti-Semitic lies is not allowed. Monika is risking federal prosecution for her public denial of the Holocaust. As long-time friends and admirers of Monika, we are saddened to see her take up this specious and dangerous cause. We hope that she will come to her senses. Until she does, we will have nothing further to do with her, and neither should the JEA.

— Cia and Ben Gadd

Then came this response from another member.

Dear Members of the Jasper Environmental Association,

I know my soul……..no need to search. I, too, support the expulsion of Monika Schaefer from the JEA.

Monika appears to have no insight or understanding into the atrocious implications of her statements. I see her as an advocate for hate.

Having Monika in the group would only erode the credibility of the JEA. I would not attend meetings if she were in attendance.

Blogs I Follow

Author John Wear reveals evidence contradicting the narrative we have been taught about Germany, Japan & the Allies in World War II. WEARS WAR is the battle to bring FAKE HISTORY into accord with the facts.